Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Saiana Dagbazhalsanova v. John M. Allen

Eastern District of New YorkOrelia E. MerchantDecided June 2, 2026No. 1:25-cv-02672

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency USCIS Read by a model
Plaintiff challenges USCIS’s decision to deny her Form I-140 Immigrant Petition under the EB-2 National Interest Waiver (“NIW”) category.
Form or filing I-140 (immigrant worker petition) Read by a model
Plaintiff challenges USCIS’s decision to deny her Form I-140 Immigrant Petition under the EB-2 National Interest Waiver (“NIW”) category.
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s fully briefed motion for summary judgment and Defendant’s cross-motion to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction or, alternatively, for summary judgment.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed.
Months pending 27.8 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On March 25, 2025, USCIS again denied Plaintiff’s I-140 Petition.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
Accordingly, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(B)(i) commits the NIW decision to the USCIS’s discretion, and the Court cannot review its denial under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiff is a Russian national residing in Brooklyn, New York.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-02672
Filed
May 13, 2025
Ended
June 2, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
385 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-06-02 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Second Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.